Something quite a bit different to close the year out. I'll have a batch of "interesting" statistics up in the next few days (tag team rankings, longest title reigns - bet you can't guess who's #1 there, etc. etc.) - but first we have something I've been wanting to get together for the longest time.

My previous rankings were horribly flawed. #'s 1 and 2 on Smackdown right now, for example, are Sean "Hasn't Been On Smackdown Since July" O'Haire and Danny Basham. That's patently absurd - awesome winning records or not. So, there had to be a way to make this a little more... fair.

So, I created the Power Rankings - the average of a wrestler's win percentage, the percentage of their matches that are main events of RAW, Smackdown or a PPV, and the percentage of their matches that are not on Heat or Velocity. I then applied this method to all 101 Superstars* who appeared at least three times on WWE TV this year. And, you know, we were sitting comfortably at exactly 100 wrestlers until Stacy Keibler worked her 5th match on this week's RAW, pissing me off and taking away my cool even list. Oh well...

(*: With the following exception - "Non-wrestlers", that is - wrestlers who do not work a full schedule, are obviously never going to fight on Heat or Velocity, but it seemed horribly unfair to factor in that extra 100% into, say, Jerry Lawler's ranking. For reasons that make perfect sense to me - your non-wrestlers are Lawler, Vince and Stephanie McMahon, Stacy Keibler and Eric Bischoff. Shane McMahon and Torrie Wilson are considered wrestlers in my book - Shane worked matches at house shows, and Torrie actually had a match or two on Velocity.)

Rank Number(Name)(Titles Held During 2003, if any)Power Ranking - The average of the three percentages recorded belowWIN/LOSS: W-L-NC (Win Percentage: {#W + [#NC/2]/TOTAL MATCHES}MAIN EVENTS: # Main Events/#Matches (Main Event Percentage)B-SHOWS: # Heat/Velocity Appearances/#Matches (Percentage of matches not on Heat or Velocity)PPVs: # of PPV appearances (10 was "perfect attendance" for RAW, 9 for Smackdown)

Ties are broken by # of PPV appearances, total matches, win percentage, main event percentage, a-show percentage and whomever OFB likes more - in that order. (Sadly, it never came down to the final criteria.)

That's quite interesting, Chirs Jericho was probably the biggest surprise on the list. I think a 10 match minimum might have been a better way to go as some of those guys really don't work on that list. Then again it's a damn fine piece of work. I would really like to see where the players on this list are six months to a year from now.

What a bummer. He's one of my favorites, and the E isn't giving him a chance. I mean, only one match on Smackdown all year, and only two wins all year. Yikes. That is as buried as one can be and still be on the payroll.

It's a very interesting list, and it does seem to accurately reflect how the WWE actually feels about the importance of each wrestler. If you want the list to more reflect kayfabe success, though, then I'd consider increasing the importance of winning percentage and adding something in the formula for holding a belt. Although I suppose you're thinking that it's enough friggin' work already, and I totally understand that. Nice job.

I was toying with bonus points for winning each belt - not to mention adding one point for each match wrestled during the year - which would've taken guys like Hogan and Regal down quite a bit and boosted the standings of guys like Jericho and Eddy. But, like you said - I didn't want to do anymore work. Maybe for 2004...

(And, as for Kanyon's extremely poor ranking - not only did he only have two wins, they were both against literal jobbers on Velocity. And about a month ago, he teamed with another actual jobber to lose to Kendrick and London. I don't know what their problem is with him - I mean, they certainly aren't one for pushing most WCW guys to the moon, but I don't see why he doesn't have a comfortable little spot carved out for himself in the midcard like Lance Storm or Chuck Palumbo.)

Well I don't know if a wrestler should be punished for wrestling on Velocity or Heat, I mean even the World Champion Triple H wrestled on Heat this year. And Benoit, Matt, and WGTT were on Velocity atleast a couple of times I believe. Still it's better than having O'Haire and Danny Basham 1 and 2. Very Impressive, now get to work on that BCS formula for us.

So this means that Goldberg was pinned more times in 2003 than he was in the rest of his career combined.

Rob asks Dave and Ric if they want to go backstage to play Hungry Hungry Hippos and Flair and Batista immediately bail. Flair wants to be Green. Man, EVERYBODY wants to be green. Except the girl in the commercials. She wanted to be pink. That either means that the ad agency was sexist or that she was communist. Of course Hungry Hungry Hippos is a rather capitalist game isnít it? No self respecting communist would play Hungry Hungry Hippos. Except Stalin. He LOVED Hungry Hungry Hippos. God, Iíve got no clue what the hell Iím rambling about anymore.-- Matt "Excalibur05" Hocking, Raw Satire writer extraordinaire

You know, I just can't call it the "WWE." I just can't. My body's rejecting it like a bad liver transplant.-- Bill Simmons, espn.com/page2

Ya, I think a 10 match minimum would have worked better, but other than that i got no complaints. How long do you think that took you in all? You've gotta get in touch with the NCAA and help em with their BCS problems. Or on second thought, mabye they should just have a giant elimination chamber match between the top 4 teams.

(edited by GoldbergWannabe49 on 1.1.04 1945)49- Out to prove to those in doubt...